Recently, we showed you a behind-the-scenes look at Cadillac's newest commercial featuring the CTS-V sedan out on Germany's hallowed-be-thy-name Nürburgring. Now, after all of the editing and post-production work has been completed, we're left with a brand new television ad spot simply dubbed "The Competition," showing viewers that one of the world's fastest sport sedans will strive to be better and better. How can you improve on 0-60 miles per hour in 3.9 seconds and a 'Ring run in just 7:59.32? We're eager to find out.

Aside from the gloriousness of watching a CTS-V do what it does best out on one of the world's greatest road courses, we like this video because it makes mention of the BMW M5 and Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG – two vehicles that inspired Cadillac to raise the bar for its own sport sedan. Give credit where credit is due, after all. Still, we like stiff competition, and you can watch Cadillac's latest ad spot for yourself after the jump.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

False advertising, the Porsche Panamera is the world's fastest production sedan. 0-60 in 3.3 seconds, top speed of 193 mph, 7:56 Nurburgring lap time. The CTS-V is a fast car, but it doesn't have the luxury, materials or sophistication of the German sedans, or Jaguars and Maseratis of the world.

At the price range it's in, the CTS (unfortunately for your tired violin) does compete.

A 4 door, is a 4 door, whether it looks like a hatch, or a coupe, to me a 4 door car is still a sedan. To claim the CTS as the world's fastest sedan, but not the world's fastest 4-door doesn't make sense.

In 2009 Jaguar was #1 in JD Power Dependability, so it isn't like they are some reliability nightmare. Now that they are away from Ford and have funding, Jaguar should improve. Especially since the next XF, plus an X-type replacement will be all aluminum chassis.

The only thing in the CTS-V's price class is the C63 AMG, and M3, and the M3 is a better sports car than a CTS-V. I know Cadillac wants to claim it is an M5 killer, but there is a reason the CTS-V is $25,000 less than the M5.

Share on other sites

Headliner, carpets, wood/carbon fiber trim, dash materials, luxury/technology features, etc. The German sedans offer more all around. A Dodge Charget SRT8 has high performance per dollar, doesn't make it a great car. I see the CTS-V compared to the M5 the same way a Dodge Charger would be compared to a CTS 3.6. Yeah the Dodge is faster 0-60, but the CTS interior is better, the car is better equipped and is made of better materials.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The Charger isn't the handler the CTS-V or M5 are. Nurburgring is far more about handling ability than straight line acceleration. Put a big enough engine into my 81 Toronado and I could have Charger 0-60 times, but I'd slide off the side of the track the first time I tried to take a corner at speed.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

"In 2009 Jaguar was #1 in JD Power Dependability, so it isn't like they are some reliability nightmare. Now that they are away from Ford and have funding, Jaguar should improve. Especially since the next XF, plus an X-type replacement will be all aluminum chassis."

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

"In 2009 Jaguar was #1 in JD Power Dependability, so it isn't like they are some reliability nightmare. Now that they are away from Ford and have funding, Jaguar should improve. Especially since the next XF, plus an X-type replacement will be all aluminum chassis."

Now how dose an aluminum frame improve reliability over steel?

It doesn't rust? I imagine for light duty use, that's a good long advantage... assuming you don't run over a puddle of mercury.

I imagine that aluminum's light weight nature translates into less wear and tear on load bearing parts... like suspension.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The Charger isn't the handler the CTS-V or M5 are. Nurburgring is far more about handling ability than straight line acceleration. Put a big enough engine into my 81 Toronado and I could have Charger 0-60 times, but I'd slide off the side of the track the first time I tried to take a corner at speed.

Thanks, but for $25,000 extra, I can hire a part time driver to chauffeur me during the times I don't want to drive.

There is a cache and prestige factor too that Cadillac just doesn't have. Cadillac builds old people Devilles, errr DTS in perrywinkle blue for the old folks, a front drive crossover, and a lame duck STS which is actually their flagship car. Cadillac doesn't even have a convertible anymore. I am not comparing the Charger to the CTS-V or M5, I am comparing a Charger SRT to a base CTS. The Charger (with a Hemi) though not a good handler, could keep up with or probably beat a CTS V6 around most race tracks because on the straight aways the Charger would really pull ahead. But just because the Charger is faster, doesn't make it better, the Dodge still has that god awful recycled trash can plastic interior. If the CTS-V was M5 good, GM would be charging $90,000 for it and getting it.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Am I the only one who silently cheered when they saw that the "Standard of the World" tagline has finally come home to roost?

They aren't the standard of the world though. It's a great slogan, but their product line doesn't back it up. What standard does the STS or DTS set? Both lame duck, snooze mobiles. Does the SRX set any worldwide standard? It's an Lincoln MKX competitor that has to sell at a discount to the Lexus RX350 and doesn't offer a hybrid like the Lexus. The Escalade is a Chevy Tahoe with chrome and wood, and I don't think they sell a lot outside of the USA, thus it sets no standard and isn't holding up the "world" end of the equation. The CTS is a good car, has 3 body styles and can be sold globally, but while good, it isn't really the standard that other car maker measure themselves by.

Think of it this way, VW has the Audi R8, Veyron, Bentley Mulsanne, Lamborghini Murcielago under it's umbrella, Mercedes has the AMG Gullwing and Maybach Zeppelin, BMW has the 760iL and Rolls-Royce Phantom. Cadillac makes nothing close to any of those products. Jaguar's lowest priced car starts at $52,500, no Cadillac sedan bases for $50,000. Cadillac is still too much GM parts bin to hang with the big boys. Really the CTS is the only product they make worthy of the wreath and crest, and even it is just class competitive, it isn't a class standard.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

They aren't the standard of the world though. It's a great slogan, but their product line doesn't back it up. What standard does the STS or DTS set? Both lame duck, snooze mobiles. Does the SRX set any worldwide standard? It's an Lincoln MKX competitor that has to sell at a discount to the Lexus RX350 and doesn't offer a hybrid like the Lexus. The Escalade is a Chevy Tahoe with chrome and wood, and I don't think they sell a lot outside of the USA, thus it sets no standard and isn't holding up the "world" end of the equation. The CTS is a good car, has 3 body styles and can be sold globally, but while good, it isn't really the standard that other car maker measure themselves by.

Think of it this way, VW has the Audi R8, Veyron, Bentley Mulsanne, Lamborghini Murcielago under it's umbrella, Mercedes has the AMG Gullwing and Maybach Zeppelin, BMW has the 760iL and Rolls-Royce Phantom. Cadillac makes nothing close to any of those products. Jaguar's lowest priced car starts at $52,500, no Cadillac sedan bases for $50,000. Cadillac is still too much GM parts bin to hang with the big boys. Really the CTS is the only product they make worthy of the wreath and crest, and even it is just class competitive, it isn't a class standard.

...And BMWs are not 'The Ultimate Driving Machines'...what's your point? It is marketing.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

A 4 door, is a 4 door, whether it looks like a hatch, or a coupe, to me a 4 door car is still a sedan. To claim the CTS as the world's fastest sedan, but not the world's fastest 4-door doesn't make sense.

In 2009 Jaguar was #1 in JD Power Dependability, so it isn't like they are some reliability nightmare. Now that they are away from Ford and have funding, Jaguar should improve. Especially since the next XF, plus an X-type replacement will be all aluminum chassis.

The only thing in the CTS-V's price class is the C63 AMG, and M3, and the M3 is a better sports car than a CTS-V. I know Cadillac wants to claim it is an M5 killer, but there is a reason the CTS-V is $25,000 less than the M5.

So not only are you classifying cars now based on the number of doors they have, but you're comparing them based on pricing? I suppose I should start comparing Panameras to Range Rovers being that they have the same number of doors and similar price points. Your logic is flawgic.

Also, to use one of your very own lines...Jaguar has a history of dependability issues and even though they may have received a JD Power dependability award for one year, it is unknown how well their vehicles will hold up over time being that the current models are still quite new to the market.

Share on other sites

Jaguar gets one year of good reliability and everything is immediately cool beans. Cadillac makes a sport-sedan that ousts the big boys in performance and handling, and everyone brings up the DTS, the Cimarron or the V8-6-4.

There is a cache and prestige factor too that Cadillac just doesn't have.

Which is why GM made this advertisement, and is returning to the Standard of the World motto. Advertising is key, and commercials like this are what will help build the necessary cachet along with creating and manufacturing top-tier vehicles.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

It doesn't rust? I imagine for light duty use, that's a good long advantage... assuming you don't run over a puddle of mercury.

I imagine that aluminum's light weight nature translates into less wear and tear on load bearing parts... like suspension.

Aluminum still corrodes I just saw a Suburban loose its drive shaft because it looked like Swiss cheese, had carbon fiber wrap but the Aluminum failed. Oxidation still happens also electrolysis, steel will last longer most of the time.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Aluminum still corrodes I just saw a Suburban loose its drive shaft because it looked like Swiss cheese, had carbon fiber wrap but the Aluminum failed. Oxidation still happens also electrolysis, steel will last longer most of the time.

Well, it corrodes, sure... but it corrodes differently. Corrosion is usually due to contamination or galvanization, and seems to depend on the part. I've seen some parts virtually disappear... yet the subframe on the Grand Prix looks brand new. My father's all aluminum '68 Chevy delivery truck also has held up extremely well, considering it been left to sit... I've seen trucks half its age made from steel completely rotted out.

A drop of mercury on the aluminum, however, and the track will turn into chalk in no time. Its a unstoppable chain reaction. Apparently old fighter planes were not allowed to have mercury anywhere near them.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Jaguar gets one year of good reliability and everything is immediately cool beans. Cadillac makes a sport-sedan that ousts the big boys in performance and handling, and everyone brings up the DTS, the Cimarron or the V8-6-4.

Which is why GM made this advertisement, and is returning to the Standard of the World motto. Advertising is key, and commercials like this are what will help build the necessary cachet along with creating and manufacturing top-tier vehicles.

Jaguar builds fast, beautiful cars, they made the XK120 and the E-type. They won Le Mans 5 times in the 1950s. So they had that pedigree long ago, and it went dormant for a while, but it is coming back now. Jaguar doesn't have a weak model, they have 3 rear drive V8 cars (and V6 overseas) that all perform. More importantly they have a singular focus and a direction.

Cadillac has gone through a few renaissances and lost its way, but they can get back the prestige they once had, if they focus. What the hell is a land barge like the XTS doing at a brand that wants to compete with BMW? What standard of the world does that set, and the STS and DTS are dead weight that can't die soon enough. I'd like to see Cadillac as standard of the world, but that current lineup isn't it. And they won't get there with Theats, Epsilons, and Lambdas either.

Just an example of how far Cadillac still has to go, the "all new" CTS coupe has a slower 0-60 time (6.4 seconds) than a Toyota Camry V6 or Mazda 6. I thought Cadillac was to be a sports/luxury brand, shouldn't their near $50k coupe be able to lay waste to a couple $28k front drivers? And I know there is more than 0-60 and the CTS is better than those 2 cars, but the CTS coupe is a sports car so is should be able to take a Camry.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

^ Reminds me of when the Chevy Beretta GT was quicker than the vaunted BMW 3-series. BMW turned it around, so will Cadillac.

XK120 is a flaccid turd, but the e-type was nice... but it came out 50 years ago. Everything since has been massively unreliable (until Ford pulled them out of the mud) and heavily archaic right up to the last 2 years or so. The most common Jag anyone saw for the most part was the hoary old XJ sedan- still wearing heavy, exposed rubber body hardware gaskets & exposed screws into the '90s. THAT is jaguar's heritage.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Well, it corrodes, sure... but it corrodes differently. Corrosion is usually due to contamination or galvanization, and seems to depend on the part. I've seen some parts virtually disappear... yet the subframe on the Grand Prix looks brand new. My father's all aluminum '68 Chevy delivery truck also has held up extremely well, considering it been left to sit... I've seen trucks half its age made from steel completely rotted out.

A drop of mercury on the aluminum, however, and the track will turn into chalk in no time. Its a unstoppable chain reaction. Apparently old fighter planes were not allowed to have mercury anywhere near them.

"Corrosion is usually due to contamination or galvanization" Sorry but galvanizationis a process to put off eventual rusting of a steel part fenders, hood or even chain link fences.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

"Corrosion is usually due to contamination or galvanization" Sorry but galvanizationis a process to put off eventual rusting of a steel part fenders, hood or even chain link fences.

I fully know what Galvanized steel is. But it is also a process of corrosion. Wiki

The proper way to galvanize steel is through... Galvanic corrosion (not dipping), where the zinc anode is consumed and adheres to the steel... and yes, it also protects metal from galvanization, oddly enough. Your chain link fence is likely dipped, and the term galvanized is somewhat inaccurate.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Aluminum isn't new, but it keeps weight down. I'd like to see Cadillac go that route. The CTS Coupe is 4250 lbs, that is way too much for a 2 door sport coupe on the small end of the midsize segment. The Infiniti G37 is 3630 lbs, that is 600 lbs less. If Cadillac really wants to beat the competition across the line, I think big time weight reduction is a good place to start.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

the G37 is utterly useless to carry 4 people, front headroom is even suspect for me and my merely "average" 5'10" frame. the CTS coupe is cramped in the back, but you can put adults back there for short trips.

For further consideration, the BMW 6-Series is smaller inside while being marginally larger outside...the CTS is only 100lbs heavier. however the CTS rides on a wheelbase 4 full inches longer. The Audi A5 is 7 inches shorter than the CTS, yet only 150lbs lighter. The G37 Coupe is 6 inches shorter than the CTS and as shown above 300lbs lighter. Your beloved Jaguar porks in a 4017lbs and 6 inches longer than the CTS.... must be all the extra weight of the XF's plastic grill. No version of the CL weighs less then 4600lbs, but it's 10 inches longer than the CTS.